Update on Car Accident

jack_tyler

Hi everyone. I put a post on here a few wks ago regarding an accident that my son had been in. I was looking for advice/help as the insurance underwriters where querying modifications on the car that my son was not aware of, and as such where asking him for an explanation as to why they had not been declared.

The outcome as of Thurs this week,  is that the underwriters have voided his policy because they do not accept his explanation that he was unaware of these mods and that they must of been on the car when he bought it. They say this is because he made an enquiry around March/April about changing the air filter on the car for a lifetime one. However my son was only made aware of his policy being void when he rang up to get an update. He had never had a phone call, email, text etc, saying that this is what was going to happen. They also told him (over the phone) that because the underwriters have now voided his policy with immediate effect, it is now as if it has never been active from his last change of vehicle in Feb. But when he went on to the app for his insurers on his phone the following day, it said that his policy had been cancelled (not void) from midnight on the 2nd Sept. So he is more than a little angry because 1, the underwriters do not believe that the car was bought with the mods on, which begs the question why would you ring up to enquiry about changing an air filter, if you knew it already had one like that. 2, he was told that his policy had been voided but it shows as cancelled, and 3, what if he had been driving around unbeknown to him that he had no insurance.  My son rang his insurance on Fri to ask them whether the policy was cancelled or voided, as he has been told there is a difference. Apparently if a policy is voided, the insurance company can do so with immediate effect and do not have to give prior notice of this. However if a policy is cancelled, they have to make the person insured aware of what date and time the policy will end. Also if a policy is voided it is then as if it has never exsisted, where as that is not the case if a policy has been cancelled. The insurers have told him that they will get the underwriters to contact him next week to confirm whether the policy was cancelled or voided. In the meantime I would be very grateful for any advice on this, for instance if my sons policy was cancelled (as it shows on the app) not voided, they did not give him notice of this, and how does he prove that the car had these modifications when he bought it?? Thanks

AdrianC

Previous thread...
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6291665/car-accident

AdrianC

jack_tyler said:

The outcome as of Thurs this week,  is that the underwriters have voided his policy because they do not accept his explanation that he was unaware of these mods and that they must of been on the car when he bought it. They say this is because he made an enquiry around March/April about changing the air filter on the car for a lifetime one.
...
So he is more than a little angry because 1, the underwriters do not believe that the car was bought with the mods on, which begs the question why would you ring up to enquiry about changing an air filter, if you knew it already had one like that.

Or he got a quote for covering modifications to the car, didn't like it, but did the mod anyway.
That's clearly what they believe he did. And I'd suggest that's the most common reality in scenarios like this.

How does he prove the car was modified before he bought it? He can't.
Not unless he can get the person he bought it off to write a letter confirming the mods were present. The insurers may not even believe that.

Sandtree

I wouldn't get too hung up on voided -v- cancelled as a policy can be retrospectively cancelled and if that was cancelled back to inception that is the same as having been voided.

There are really two potential questions here:
1) when were the mods done (pre or post purchase)
2) if pre-purchase is it reasonable for them to not realise there were mods

First of all, find the advert or any materials you can from the purchase and see if it mentions there about any modifications. If it does then obviously you are in a hole of your own creating but if it doesn't then its a reasonable piece of evidence.

Secondly you need to look at photos of the VRS -v- your car and see if there is anything obviously different... given you mentioned the exhaust has been upgraded/changed I'd be surprised if its got the same tail pipes but it is possible... again if they obviously dont look the same it'll be hard to argue that having been shopping around for this model that you didn't notice there were differences. If they look identical and the advert says nothing about mods then you are in a reasonable place for eliminating pre-purchase changes as being reckless (the threshold needed for voiding generally)

You dont say how long you have owned the car for? MOTs, assuming its of an age, will show miles per year done and if you've owned it for a short time then it may well be possible to get an engineer that says the exhaust is clearly older than the 6 months/5,000 miles that its been in your ownership... the longer you've owned it though the more difficult this would be

NSG666

I just wonder whether your son is playing straight with you.
When I was young I was all over my car checking and tinkering with this that and the other whether it needed it or not. I'd be very surprised if someone considering changing the type of air filter fitted hadn't already poked around in the existing one and knew what was there already.
I'd also be surprised if an enthusiast selling the car didn't go through every mod made in infinite detail being proud of their car and how it was better than the rest.
I'm not calling your son a liar but the add the above plus the fact he phoned his insurer about a mod and you can start to see their point of view.

AdrianC

Sandtree said:

You dont say how long you have owned the car for?

The other thread says February.

jack_tyler

AdrianC said:

jack_tyler said:

The outcome as of Thurs this week,  is that the underwriters have voided his policy because they do not accept his explanation that he was unaware of these mods and that they must of been on the car when he bought it. They say this is because he made an enquiry around March/April about changing the air filter on the car for a lifetime one.
...
So he is more than a little angry because 1, the underwriters do not believe that the car was bought with the mods on, which begs the question why would you ring up to enquiry about changing an air filter, if you knew it already had one like that.

Or he got a quote for covering modifications to the car, didn't like it, but did the mod anyway.
That's clearly what they believe he did. And I'd suggest that's the most common reality in scenarios like this.

How does he prove the car was modified before he bought it? He can't.
Not unless he can get the person he bought it off to write a letter confirming the mods were present. The insurers may not even believe that.

When he first enquired about changing the air filter, he was told that the underwriters would not cover him for it, so he didn't do it. He  has tried to contact the previous owner but the number he has for them must of changed as it doesn't connect

Sandtree

jack_tyler said:

AdrianC said:

jack_tyler said:

The outcome as of Thurs this week,  is that the underwriters have voided his policy because they do not accept his explanation that he was unaware of these mods and that they must of been on the car when he bought it. They say this is because he made an enquiry around March/April about changing the air filter on the car for a lifetime one.
...
So he is more than a little angry because 1, the underwriters do not believe that the car was bought with the mods on, which begs the question why would you ring up to enquiry about changing an air filter, if you knew it already had one like that.

Or he got a quote for covering modifications to the car, didn't like it, but did the mod anyway.
That's clearly what they believe he did. And I'd suggest that's the most common reality in scenarios like this.

How does he prove the car was modified before he bought it? He can't.
Not unless he can get the person he bought it off to write a letter confirming the mods were present. The insurers may not even believe that.

When he first enquired about changing the air filter, he was told that the underwriters would not cover him for it, so he didn't do it. He  has tried to contact the previous owner but the number he has for them must of changed as it doesn't connect

This will be another big problem for you then... if the underwriter wouldn't have covered the modifications had they been declared they can still void the policy even if they accept the non-declaration was unintentional/innocent 

Aretnap

Sandtree said:

jack_tyler said:

AdrianC said:

jack_tyler said:

The outcome as of Thurs this week,  is that the underwriters have voided his policy because they do not accept his explanation that he was unaware of these mods and that they must of been on the car when he bought it. They say this is because he made an enquiry around March/April about changing the air filter on the car for a lifetime one.
...
So he is more than a little angry because 1, the underwriters do not believe that the car was bought with the mods on, which begs the question why would you ring up to enquiry about changing an air filter, if you knew it already had one like that.

Or he got a quote for covering modifications to the car, didn't like it, but did the mod anyway.
That's clearly what they believe he did. And I'd suggest that's the most common reality in scenarios like this.

How does he prove the car was modified before he bought it? He can't.
Not unless he can get the person he bought it off to write a letter confirming the mods were present. The insurers may not even believe that.

When he first enquired about changing the air filter, he was told that the underwriters would not cover him for it, so he didn't do it. He  has tried to contact the previous owner but the number he has for them must of changed as it doesn't connect

This will be another big problem for you then... if the underwriter wouldn't have covered the modifications had they been declared they can still void the policy even if they accept the non-declaration was unintentional/innocent 

Only if the customer failed to take reasonable care to avoid making a misrepresentation. See CIDRA sections 2 and 4. There must be carelessness, at a minimum, on the consumer's part before the insurer is entitled to any remedy at all.

There are various cases where the FOS has ruled that failing to realise that a second hand car has been modified does not necessarily amount to carelessness, and they have ordered insurers to pay claims even where they would not have covered the modification at all has it been declared. 

KimJongUn88

If they’ve voided it from inception, they should refund all premiums your son has paid to date.

Sandtree

KimJongUn88 said:

If they’ve voided it from inception, they should refund all premiums your son has paid to date.

No, The Consumer Insurance Disclosure and Representations (CIDRA) Act 2012 doesn't require premiums to be returned for a void insurance policy where its been voided for reckless or intentional non-disclosure